Ethnobotany of the Caucasus – The Region

Bussmann, Rainer W.; Batsatsashvili, Ketevan; Kikvidze, Zaal; Khutsishvili, Manana; Maisaia, Inesa; Sikharulidze, Shalva; Tchelidze, David; Zambrana, Narel Y. Paniagua

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-49412-8_17

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cornus mas and Urtica dioica are used for anemia; Rosa canina, Plantago major, and Urtica dioica for cleansing the blood. All these species have also been reported for similar diseases in literature sources [14,18,78,88]. On the other hand, seven species are named for blood problems in Turkey, six of which are used for anemia (Rosa spinosissima, Prunus avium, Hypericum linarioides, Urtica dioica, Prunus laurocerasus, Rosa canina), one for iron de ciency (Vaccinium myrtillus).…”

Section: Other Medicinal Use-categoriesmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Among the rheumatism reports, local names given for the species indicate a very diverse ethnolinguistic background of the communities. The use of U. dioica for rheumatism is also frequently cited in the literature [18,20,21,23,68,67,71,85,72,73,77,78]. These consensus might show the potential activity of the Urtica dioica for rheumatism.…”

Section: Muscle-skeletal Systemmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Helichrysum spp. were also widely reported species to cure kidney problems in the cited literature [68,75,71,79,72,78,18], but Rosa canina has few reports [79,18]. In addition, Plantago major is used for various genitourinary diseases in Turkey.…”

Section: Genitourinary Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent studies conducted in Georgia (Sakartvelo) reveal a noteworthy ethnobotanical knowledge of people living in various regions [11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Furthermore, the book "Ethnobotany of the Caucasus" presents detailed information on about culturally salient 130 plant species currently and historically noted in the South Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan) [18]. However, apart from a number of ethnobotanical studies published in certain parts of the Western Lesser Caucasus region, little ethnobotanical knowledge has yet been systematically documented in the mountains around Turkey-Georgia border.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Medicinal ethnobotany of wild plants: A cross-cultural comparison around Georgia-Turkey border, The Western Lesser Caucasus

Kazancı

Oruç

Mosulishvili

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Mountains of the Western Lesser Caucasus with its rich plant diversity, multicultural and multilingual nature host diverse ethnobotanical knowledge related to medicinal plants. However, cross cultural medicinal ethnobotany and patterns of plant knowledge have not yet been investigated in the region. Doing so could highlight the salient medicinal plant species and show the variations between communities. This study aimed to determine and discuss the similarities and differences of medicinal ethnobotany among people living in highland pastures on both sides of the Georgia-Turkey border.Methods: During the 2017 and 2018 summer transhumance period, 119 participants, (74 in Turkey, 45 in Georgia) were interviewed with semi-structured questions. The data was structured in use-reports (URs) following the ICPC classification. Cultural Importance (CI) Index, Informant Consensus Factor (FIC), shared/separate species-use combinations, as well as literature data were used for comparing medicinal ethnobotany of the communities.Results: 1506 UR for 152 native wild plant species were documented. More than half of the species are in common on both sides of the border. Out of 817 species-use combinations, only 9% of the use incidences are shared between communities across the border. Around 66% of these reports had not been previously mentioned specifically in the compared literature. Only 33 species have similar use reports in both countries, most important of which are Plantago major, Urtica dioica, Picea orientalis, Anthemis spp., Sambucus ebulus, Achillea millefolium, Helichrysum rubicundum, Mentha longifolia, Pinus sylvestris var. hamata, Hypericum perforatum, Tussilago farfara, Helichrysum plicatum, Rumex crispus, Berberis vulgaris, Origanum vulgare. More than half of species reported in each country were found to have more than one part of the plant valued for medicinal use. The most common way of using plants medicinally in both countries is drinking the water infusion of aerial parts with flowers. Based on CI index value, two thirds of the salient 15 genera in both countries have use reports in at least seven medicinal use categories. While the most cited category with highest FIC is digestive in Georgia, it is skin category in Turkey. Patterns of medicinal plant knowledge among studied communities appear to be connected with more than one cultural factor, in particular ethnolinguistic diversity, cultural background, and access to multilingual written folk and scientific literature, or probably a combination of various factors.Conclusion: Considering the regions’ floral similarity, common historical-cultural contact, and similar livelihood strategies of the communities, shared ethnomedicinal knowledge across the Georgia-Turkey border is quite low. Even though the impacts of accessing multilingual folk and scientific literature are likely to be significant, the factors that shape the medicinal plant knowledge patterns of the communities are shown to be variable among species, needing further research into intracultural diversity and socio-economical conditions, as well as the political history across the border.

show abstract

Section: Other Medicinal Use-categoriesmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Muscle-skeletal Systemmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Genitourinary Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Medicinal ethnobotany of wild plants: A cross-cultural comparison around Georgia-Turkey border, The Western Lesser Caucasus

Kazancı

Oruç

Mosulishvili

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent studies conducted in Georgia (Sakartvelo) reveal a noteworthy ethnobotanical knowledge of people living in various regions [11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Furthermore, the book "Ethnobotany of the Caucasus" presents detailed information on about culturally salient 130 plant species (48 wild woody plants) currently and historically noted in the South Caucasus (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan) [18]. However, apart from a number of ethnobotanical studies published in certain parts of the western portion of the Lesser Caucasus region, little ethnobotanical knowledge has yet been systematically documented in the mountains around Turkey-Georgia border [See literature cited in Table 2 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Medicinal Ethnobotany of Wild Woody Plants: a Cross-cultural Comparison Around Georgia-turkey Border, the Western Lesser Caucasus

Kazancı

Oruç

Mosulishvili

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Mountains of the Western Lesser Caucasus with its rich plant diversity, multicultural and multilingual nature, host diverse ethnobotanical knowledge related to medicinal plants. However, medicinal ethnobotany and the factors shaping the patterns of plant knowledge/use in the region have not been investigated broadly yet. Doing so could show the variations between communities and highlight the acknowledged salient medicinal plant species. We aimed to determine and discuss the similarities and differences of medicinal ethnobotany among people living in highland pastures on both sides of Georgia-Turkey border. Methods: During 2017 and 2018 summer transhumance period, we interviewed 119 participants, 74 in Turkey, 45 in Georgia, with semi-structured. We structured our data in use-reports (URs) following ICPC classification. We used Cultural Importance (CI) Index, Informant Consensus Factor (FIC), shared/separate species-use combinations, as well as literature data for comparison. Results:We documented 63 native wild woody plant species nearly half of which are in common on both side of the border. 267 distinct species-use combinations are reported.Only 7% of themare shared.Around 63% of the reports have not been mentioned specifically in the literature. The species having similar/same use reports in both countries are Picea orientalis, Pinus sylvestris var. hamata, Berberis vulgaris, Sambucus nigra, Vaccinium arctostaphylos, Vaccinium myrtillus, Tilia rubra subsp. caucasica, Crataegus monogyna, Rosa canina, Rosa hirtissima and Sorbus aucaparia. For 40% of the species in both countries, more than one plant part is used medicinally.The most common way of using shrubs and trees as medicine in Georgia is drinking the water infusion of fruits and leaves, while in Turkey drinking the water decoction of fruits and roots. 60% of the top 20 genera in both countries have use reports for at least three medicinal use categories. The most cited reports with high agreement arerelated with the treatment of digestive disorders in both countries. It seems that patterns of medicinal knowledge is connected with more than one cultural factors in particular etnolinguistic diversity, cultural background, and access to multilingual written folk and scientific literature,even combination of various factors.Conclusion: Considering their floral similarity, common historical/cultural contact along with similar livelihood strategies, shared ethnomedicinal knowledge across the border is quite low. Even though the effects of accessing multilingual written folk and scientific literature is likely to be significantly relevant, the factors that shape the medicinal knowledgepatterns of the communities seem complex and dynamic which needs further assessments considering intracultural diversity, socio-economical conditions, as well as political history across the border.

show abstract

Multigenerational differences in harvesting and use of wild edible fruits and nuts in the South Caucasus

Faruk,

Nersesyan,

Papikyan

et al. 2023

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societal Impact StatementEcosystem services are underpinned by biodiversity, which is rapidly eroding globally, threatening rural livelihoods and culture. Examining the uses of wild edible plants (WEPs) that are important to rural communities gives insight into the value of a biodiverse landscape to local communities. Here, the importance of considering age groups in future ethnobotanical and conservation studies is highlighted, as this can enhance our understanding on the dependence of use within a landscape, informing more inclusive conservation actions.Summary Wild edible plants (WEP) remain an important aspect of many rural communities across the world, yet the decline in the diversity and knowledge of WEP use is becoming a global concern. In the Biodiversity Hotspot of the Caucasus, there is few cross‐cultural and multigenerational comparisons of plant uses, limiting our knowledge of resource use and dependence within biodiverse landscapes. Here, we investigate the patterns of use for wild edible fruits and nuts in the South Caucasus, focusing on multigenerational differences in harvesting patterns, diversity and use through semi‐structured interviews in Armenia and Georgia. We calculated use values (UV) for each genera harvested and compared the diversity of genera used between age groups. Pearson chi‐square was used to explore the relationship between age‐groups and genera harvested. We found 53% of rural population (n = 220) actively harvest from wild populations, with older age groups harvesting the highest diversity of plants. Twenty‐four species from 16 genera are harvested, with Berberis vulgaris L. and Rosa canina L. shared between both communities. The association between age and diversity of harvested genera was significant (χ2[48, N = 506] = 114.75, p < .01), mainly driven by a strong positive association with Berberis spp. L., Crataegus spp. L. and Ribes spp. L. with the under 18s and Prunus spp. L. with under 35s. Young harvesters used WEP for income generation, while medicinal use increases across older age groups. Foraging activities within South Caucasus' communities remains active; however, the use of WEP is not uniform within and across different communities.

show abstract

Ethnobotany of the Caucasus – The Region

Cited by 5 publications

References 20 publications

Medicinal ethnobotany of wild plants: A cross-cultural comparison around Georgia-Turkey border, The Western Lesser Caucasus

Medicinal ethnobotany of wild plants: A cross-cultural comparison around Georgia-Turkey border, The Western Lesser Caucasus

Medicinal Ethnobotany of Wild Woody Plants: a Cross-cultural Comparison Around Georgia-turkey Border, the Western Lesser Caucasus

Multigenerational differences in harvesting and use of wild edible fruits and nuts in the South Caucasus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About